Still improper guild attributions (MVP, Gold trip)

[Zyntree]

Just wanted to bring back up that this was never fixed. I'm manually recording my guild's tribs so I know who is contributing and how much, but it would be so much nicer if the weekly contributions thins actually worked (never even popped up last week). I know, boo hoo for me right.

Also, the leader on quests in the guild doesn't show up right, and it attributes the MVP to the wrong person in the guild messages, even though it goes on the right profile.

iOS... anyone else?

[The Pale Rider]

Just wanted to bring back up that this was never fixed. I'm manually recording my guild's tribs so I know who is contributing and how much, but it would be so much nicer if the weekly contributions thins actually worked (never even popped up last week). I know, boo hoo for me right.

Also, the leader on quests in the guild doesn't show up right, and it attributes the MVP to the wrong person in the guild messages, even though it goes on the right profile.

iOS... anyone else?

We are experiencing all of the same iOS problems.

[~Nate~]

Android too

[Zyntree]

A new problem was just brought to my attention. One of my members contributed 500k, but it did not show up in my guild notifications. This is a little more troubling for the fact that I can now no longer trust that I can even manually keep track of guild contributions...

[LadyBadTouch]

I submitted a ticket and had a response yesterday. This was the response..

We are aware of this specific issue with the guild quests and we are working to resolve it as quickly as possible. I apologize for any inconvenience you may have experienced and we appreciate your continued patience.

Regards,
V

[Sol Invictus]

What I found to be odd is that this seemed to work correctly during the first week that this was implemented.
Is that incorrect?

[LadyBadTouch]

We do a weekly high commander based off of contributions. Not only does it suck that we can't accurately keep track of contributions, the log hasn't updated in over 3 weeks!!!

[busteroaf]

Rewarding based off contributions? That seems interesting.

[LadyBadTouch]

Rewarding based off contributions? That seems interesting.

We do a random daily high commander, a weekly (based off of contribution) and a monthly member (to the person who was the most well rounded) the other positions are permanent.

It's been like this since the beginning, so I couldn't tell you that our contributions have jumped since implementing it. Though, it does make for healthy competition. Might as well reward people for helping our guild out the most financially.

[Zyntree]

This sounds like a good idea. I think I will do this. Give us the most money!!!

[LadyBadTouch]

O.o lmao at this being a new idea... I thought a weekly high commander spot would go hand in hand with the weekly contribution list. I didn't think it would be an original idea o.O The only problem is that the stupid thing hasn't been updating for weeks!

[busteroaf]

O.o lmao at this being a new idea... I thought a weekly high commander spot would go hand in hand with the weekly contribution list. I didn't think it would be an original idea o.O The only problem is that the stupid thing hasn't been updating for weeks!

I don't think its new, just odd that some people still place a value on someone because of monetary donations. Especially since it's seems a little p2w within the guild. Do alts factor into your equation? There are plenty of guilds that swap toons and alts in and out regularly.

[Unresolved]

I don't think its new, just odd that some people still place a value on someone because of monetary donations. Especially since it's seems a little p2w within the guild. Do alts factor into your equation? There are plenty of guilds that swap toons and alts in and out regularly.

HC spots are almost always pay2win within guilds. Gold contributions? Pay2win. War points? Pay2win(gems). Strongest players? Pay2win(chests). Top of the leaderboards? Pay2win.

[busteroaf]

HC spots are almost always pay2win within guilds. Gold contributions? Pay2win. War points? Pay2win(gems). Strongest players? Pay2win(chests). Top of the leaderboards? Pay2win.

Unless I'm mistaken, that's not how RR rolls.

[LadyBadTouch]

I know you don't know anything about our guild, but we ask that our members spend gold on their armor, boosting their stats. Contributions are not necessary. Giving out a high commander position weekly to the person that contributed the most is just a bonus for them. It can be seen as an incentive, but gold contributions are not our agenda...

It's up to them how much they want to contribute and how much the high commander stats are worth to them. They know they are not obligated at all to contribute.

I don't get your slang? Alts... meaning their side accounts? We don't allow members to have more than one account in the guild.



*How is everyone else basing their leadership role spots? I would just assume that if you dont have daily/weekly/monthly spots, that they are permanent, and it goes to a well rounded person that has show consistency in contributions/mvp scores/activeness. How is that any different? BTW that's what our monthly and permanent positions are based off of. We just like to give some options so everyone has a chance at a stats boost once in awhile.

[Unresolved]

Unless I'm mistaken, that's not how RR rolls.

I didn't say that's how RR rolls.

[busteroaf]

I didn't say that's how RR rolls.

I didn't say you did, but you did say "almost always".

[LadyBadTouch]

I was under the impression that RR requires all of their members to purchase gems for guild wars?

[busteroaf]

I was under the impression that RR requires all of their members to purchase gems for guild wars?
What does purchasing gems have to do with guild donations? Much like you said, we'd rather the guild improve their armor before donating.

[LadyBadTouch]

well, if you are poo-pooing on the idea of giving incentives for the use fictional money, but see nothing wrong with requiring members to spend real money for incentives...there is a disconnect.

*I'm not saying you guys shouldn't have those requirements. Though, I don't appreciate the condescending attitude towards our weekly slot. It was never there to drive up contributions, only to reward members that do give more donations. In the end, that helps out all of our members, so they should get something out of it. I can't help it that in turn, it has turned into a competition for the members. Like I said before, it's nothing anyone has to do. Plus the members are getting fusion boost armors too, so it's something they are doing anyway.

[busteroaf]

well, if you are poo-pooing on the idea of giving incentives for the use fictional money, but see nothing wrong with requiring members to spend real money for incentives...there is a disconnect.

Is there a minimum gem spending rule in our guild? No. Popular opinion says otherwise. Why? Because we continually talk about the differences between f2p and p2w people? Because the guild note mentions it?

Why does it mention it? Because we don't want leachers who aren't going to contribute and think they can just join up and enjoy the ride. We had over 1000 guild requests after the first war. By having "blah blah gem minimum" it keeps many of those people away.

[LadyBadTouch]

Is there a minimum gem spending rule in our guild? No. Popular opinion says otherwise. Why? Because we continually talk about the differences between f2p and p2w people? Because the guild note mentions it?

Why does it mention it? Because we don't want leachers who aren't going to contribute and think they can just join up and enjoy the ride. We had over 1000 guild requests after the first war. By having "blah blah gem minimum" it keeps many of those people away.


I've never looked up your guild, therefore I've never read the description. I've only heard what people have had to say about it.

What we do works for us, and our members are happy. We don't have any high expectations on them, but we also don't have high expectations as a guild. Just stay in the top 100 with minimal real life spending. I think my members prefer it that way.

I don't see anything wrong with rewarding members who contribute the most. There are a ton of options for them to get a chance at leadership roles, that's just one of them.

stop being a ****.

[busteroaf]

I've never looked up your guild, therefore I've never read the description. I've only heard what people have had to say about it.

What we do works for us, and our members are happy. We don't have any high expectations on them, but we also don't have high expectations as a guild. Just stay in the top 100 with minimal real life spending. I think my members prefer it that way.

I don't see anything wrong with rewarding members who contribute the most. There are a ton of options for them to get a chance at leadership roles, that's just one of them.

stop being a ****.

I'm sorry, I honestly didn't see anything that I wrote as being a ****. I never poo poo'd on the idea or how you run your guild. I simply questioned it on the potential "p2w" basis, that, like I mentioned, seems to be so taboo topic to the forums lately, and asked how an alt-rotation might affect it. Then I mentioned that as far as I'm aware RR doesn't use the "guild donations" as a basis for leadership roles. That was all.

By alts, I mean people having other devices, playing, hoarding money, bringing said alts in, donating, and leaving. Rinse and repeat. It is how a lot of guilds have built up their money. And yes, there are many ways people give out leadership roles. That is why I asked if having alts factored into that equation.

Also, by introducing our "required gem buying", then saying you've never looked up the guild, and only know things based on what other people have said about it, is part of what perpetuates the constant negative attitude towards the guild, and often why much of what we say is misunderstood or simply taken the wrong way. Many of our members have had a significant presence on the forum since the start of this game. But since many just think "oh, they just bought their way to a win, they're cheaters, they hack", whatever, they don't listen to anything our members say, thus many have just stopped posting or even reading the forums. Many others feel that our presence is only to help ourselves, and then others are just jumping on the "we need someone to hate" bandwagon. Look at many of the threads. People helping just as much as anyone else. Just because someone has the RR tag doesn't mean they're instantly bashing someone else every time they post. But that is what happens because that is what people say about us is it not?

Back to our required spending... Do our members guy gems? Sure. All of them? Can't say, I haven't seen everyone's receipts. Probably not to be honest. Many of them just farm the hell out of free offers and don't spend them on chests, ever, thus allowing them to spend as little as possible when they do want to build up. Again, is it a requirement? No. Its more a deterrent to others to have that. It allows us to be selective. That is why there's a waiting line to get into the guild.

[Brutal1977]

Just wanted to bring back up that this was never fixed. I'm manually recording my guild's tribs so I know who is contributing and how much, but it would be so much nicer if the weekly contributions thins actually worked (never even popped up last week). I know, boo hoo for me right.

Also, the leader on quests in the guild doesn't show up right, and it attributes the MVP to the wrong person in the guild messages, even though it goes on the right profile.

iOS... anyone else?

Not to go all on topic or anything... :)

I first noticed problems with gold hitting Monday night. Gold donations stopped incrementing the total on the guild member page, at least for some members. The medals seemed to have been working for the week previous after being broken for a while. Might still be broke, I haven't been paying much attention to them.

[geo81]

I use to give rank to the person who donated the most, every now and then. Nowadays I give a high commander promo to the commander that does the best in a war. Sentinel and champion I make the two strongest members until the next war. Then I give it to the new strongest person, which so far has always changed.

[Brutal1977]

I first noticed problems with gold hitting Monday night. Gold donations stopped incrementing the total on the guild member page, at least for some members.

Woke up this morning to find the correct total, for my donations anyway. Anyone else?

[LadyBadTouch]

Woke up this morning to find the correct total, for my donations anyway. Anyone else?

Yes, that will put some members minds at ease! It sucked for the new members who were donating and not getting any credit for it. Oh and the contribution log is back up! Yesssssssss my life just got so much easier LOL!

[LadyBadTouch]

Back to our required spending... Do our members guy gems? Sure. All of them? Can't say, I haven't seen everyone's receipts. Probably not to be honest. Many of them just farm the hell out of free offers and don't spend them on chests, ever, thus allowing them to spend as little as possible when they do want to build up. Again, is it a requirement? No. Its more a deterrent to others to have that. It allows us to be selective. That is why there's a waiting line to get into the guild.


I honestly do not see anything wrong with your guild and how it is ran. I don't hate RR at all, I actually admire it very much. I'd only have problems with individuals who come off being jerks.

I just couldn't wrap my head around the idea of you thinking that requiring gems (even though you say it's a stated requirement, but just a bluff to deter potential moochers) was any different as far as P2win is concerned, than offering (not even requiring) members an option to be HC for a week based on their contributions.

What I'd like to know is what you guys are basing your leadership roles on. Does someone just have to be nice to be an HC? Or do you guys counter in how active someone is, how many pts they earned during GWs...I mean what is the basis here? Because other than being friend, just being active and being MVP in the guild (maybe doing the technical things outside of the game like spread sheets and stuff) everything else has to be based on P2W.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see a lot of options outside of those things to consider for leadership roles.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but I'm assuming RR gives preference to people that are on the waiting list, who commit to spending a certain amount of gems. I just don't see how you guys can do it otherwise. What did you guys earn last time, 11mil in pts? It's just logical that if two people with the same stats came up and asked to be a member and one offered to spend $100 on gems and the other offered no gems, that you would pick the one willing to spend money on gems.

Especially since free offers are gone now too... what is going to happen to the members that were solely relying on those free offers? (Oh and if there is a way to still access this, please indulge me, I'd love another opportunity at some coffee or a steel forged knife for only $4.95)

I mean we aren't even talking about HC's here, we are talking about commanders that have to be P2W to be in your guild.

Excuse me for taking a little offense. I just didn't appreciate the critical thoughts on our one P2W weekly HC spot. When its obvious that RR for the most part is a P2W guild.

Really now...


*You could be basing HC's off of their stats...but most the time in a guild such as yours, having the highest stats is going to have to be based off of some gem spending too. Especially now that Epics aren't fusible.

[knights]

Woke up this morning to find the correct total, for my donations anyway. Anyone else?

probably just some server lag

[Bride of Eunuchorn]

Don't mind Buster, he's always on the defensive, which I can't blame him for. I'm not going to go back & scour for the exact wording, but something was said about gold & gems being comparable to pay to win & I don't believe this is the case, though the gem cost of lvl.3 TFs gives me second thought. Lots of intricate strings to create balance. Games like this are very all or nothing & most of the people in my guild have been with me on Line even before guilds were released. All they know is All. We can't even really conceptualize what it's like to not have all level.3 TFs or nests, + an alt with all lvl.3 TFs for an extra ~2+mil a week in the coffers. Not to mention, we haven't had a Gquest to guide us into one avenue or another for chunks of time. I think in a f2p mentality like your guild basically is, balancing lvl.2/3 TFs with armor/donations is a more by-day kind of decision, so your HC system works well. We gave all our big spenders HC for the war, but otherwise we use a mix of permanent HCs & by request rotating slots if you need for boss/arena/DPC runs etc
The biggest problem, which you mentioned, is the long-term, low spenders. Asking devoted guildies to step down is tough, but in the end, you can't stay #1 unless all your members are P2W.